Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

It's not just the snow in the Lake Erie area; it's the relentless cloudiness.

A friend of mine is from Winnipeg and would tell me all kinds of fun stories about the extreme winters. ("You can ride your bike pretty well on the snow, it packs, but if your pedals are made of cheap steel they might shatter.")

He went to the University of Michigan and found the cloudiness very depressing. Winnipeg was colder, but had much more sunshine.

As I understand it, Seattle's actually only gloomy and rainy about four months a year, and a very nice, mild climate otherwise. Anyone who lives there/has lived there know? When I looked it up I was surprised to discover Seattle actually is *not* at the top of the U.S. rainfall list.

I despise Seattle. I have family up there so we're in the city at least a few weeks every year, and I just HATE it. I'm sure it's irrational, but living as I do in a Southern California suburb where it's sunny and dry and 80 all the time, the sudden loss of constant sunlight and the daily drizzling infuriate me to no end. The city itself is nice enough and much greener than I'm used to, but the weather... argh.

I guess its what you're used to. Phoenix, Dallas and Houston are too hot (and the latter incredibly muggy), but I find similarly steamy New Orleans utterly perfect in every grimy way, probably because I'm generally soaked in liquor and jazz when I'm there. I've only been to Boston once, and didn't particularly enjoy it, in large part because they were in the middle of the Big Dig and getting anywhere was brutal.

I utterly love Los Angeles, but I can see why many other people would completely hate it.

We have rainy/cloud season (November to May) and sunny/dry season (May to November).

I'd break it up a little more. We have "Glorious" (mid-June through mid-September), where it's sunny every day, hot* during the day and wonderfully cool in the evenings. We have "Miserable" (December-March) of cold and rain, but fortunately very little snow. The rest of the time is pleasantly temperate, though often overcast with light rain. I like to say that I can wear jeans, a t-shirt and a light jacket 300 days out of the year and be comfortable in that.

Every time I taunt people in the midwest or east coast about our mild climate (no matter what time of year), my brother-in-law in L.A. fires back about how it's _still_ 76 and sunny there, so I know where LA El Hombre is coming from.

* Seattle has the hottest 80 degrees I've ever felt -- the air gets all the heat sucked out of it every night by Puget Sound, so it never really has time to warm up to get a thermometer to really rise, but the direct sunlight is really intense.

I have lived in Minnesota, North Dakota, Washington DC, Philadelphia, and Seattle (also spent lots of time in NY and Chicago), and Seattle is by far my favorite of the bunch for many different reasons.

I despise Seattle. I have family up there so we're in the city at least a few weeks every year, and I just HATE it. I'm sure it's irrational, but living as I do in a Southern California suburb where it's sunny and dry and 80 all the time, the sudden loss of constant sunlight and the daily drizzling infuriate me to no end. The city itself is nice enough and much greener than I'm used to, but the weather... argh.

Wow, you just completely proved my point about the spoiled SoCal folks.

I like to say that I can wear jeans, a t-shirt and a light jacket 300 days out of the year and be comfortable in that.

Pretty much, the only time I really get frustrated with Seattle weather is the occasional 55 degree day in late May.

Every time I think about living in the midwest (where I grew up and spent a good portion of my adult life), I think "Why did I want to live someplace that's 95 and humid in the summer, and 0 degrees and icy in the winter?"

I'll say this--after growing up in Pennsylvania I lived in Tennessee for two years. Absolutely loved it there, but whereas I would get sick with more than just a standard cold about once a year in Pennsylvania, I got seriously sick about eight times in the two years I was in Tennessee. Some combination of germs my immune system was unfamiliar with and the much warmer winter, I guess.

Socal would be a great place to live if there weren't so many people there.

Slam Ball: twitter feed of sweet slam ball dunks in vine form. Crashed my work computer because so much badass was on one page.

The double dunk on July 1 is great. I used to watch slamball some on tv a few years ago, I'm surprised they are still doing it, seems like a pile of nasty injuries waiting to happen, but I guess the awesome dunks make up for that.

When you're making the money Lebron is making, it seems to me that you can make any city pleasant and livable. You can't change the weather (though if a few more of Lebron's investments pay off...), but at $20 million a year you can make your personal experience with Akron/Cleveland a freaking delight.

Being a white dude who grew up in Utah my choices for best NBA cities I've spent enough time in to form an opinion of would not match up well win most players I think, but...
Chicago
Boston
Portland
New York
Brooklyn
LA
Philly
SLC
...
...
...
Phoenix

I mostly hated living in Arizona so it would be close to the bottom for me, but I haven't been to the south east of Arizona and I'm pretty sure Most places in Texas or the South would appeal to me even less. Cleveland would be really low on my list too I think, but just like I have a soft spot for SLC I can see why people from there would still like it.

When you're making the money Lebron is making, it seems to me that you can make any city pleasant and livable. You can't change the weather (though if a few more of Lebron's investments pay off...), but at $20 million a year you can make your personal experience with Akron/Cleveland a freaking delight.

Chris Herring
Phil says he's expects an answer from Carmelo today, but that he also expected one yesterday and the day before that, too.

There is no tone here, of course, but you wonder if Phil's sniping in the press might not play poorly in this kind of free agent situation. I doubt it's a big thing in any direction, but I doubt it helps, given that Melo has the leverage here.

Seriously though, do you really think, does anyone REALLY think, that one of the most famous people in the entire world, free to choose where he wants to live and work for 7 months a year--mostly winter, at that--is going to choose Cleveland?

Yes. He didn't have any problems with Cleveland, the city, for seven years. He had a problem with how likely the roster was going to help him win a championship. If he likes Irving and Wiggins/Love more than he likes Wade and Bosh going forward, he'll sign in Cleveland. I know, I know, that will warp your fragile little mind. Deal with it.

There is no tone here, of course, but you wonder if Phil's sniping in the press might not play poorly in this kind of free agent situation. I doubt it's a big thing in any direction, but I doubt it helps, given that Melo has the leverage here.

I don't know the tone either, but I know how Phil talks and I don't think it's sniping at all. Just Phil being Phil.

My initial reaction to the Thomas news was that it would seemingly give some flexibility with Bledsoe in a possible S&T or even Dragic if they like his value on the market right now. Then again, I figured the acquisition of Bledsoe guaranteed Dragic would be gone, so maybe they see it as a rotational thing where those 3 add up to the 96 back court minutes per game.

His wife might like that. Last time they weren't even engaged yet, this time they are married and they have a third child on the way. Getting older and married I think changes math about what city is better or worse to live in. Lebron definitely markets himself as a family man a lot more than he used to. Miami in particular seems like a place that is probably better when you're younger and less attached.

Either way, right now I think winning and getting paid are his top priorities, it's not like he'll need to be spending the rest of his life in either city, but the professional legacy he builds next few years will stay with him for a long time.

What do people think of MIA's title chances next year? (Assuming LeBron comes back)

I think they'll be about the same as they were this year. Barring a major trade/free agent shakeup or Derrick Rose actually playing and doing so at near 2011 form, the rest of the East still blows, so the Heat should have an almost free ride to the Finals again. I remember the "It's really hard to make the Finals 4 years in a row" talk earlier this season and I'm sure we'll hear it again about making it 5 years in a row, but I don't think people are taking into account just how truly bad the East is. Historical things happen when a good team plays in a historically bad conference.

(And then the Heat will get crushed again by a Western Team that doesn't need a joke conference to hide their weaknesses and make them look great by default)

Pretty much agreed on Heat odds. It depends on which Wade you get. If Wade is going to struggle to even be a good 3rd option, then the Heat are behind the Bulls with a healthy Rose and an added superstar; still ahead by default of everyone else and the Bulls without those guys; and quite unlikely to win the Finals even if they make it. If Wade is like Ginobili in '13 -- looked washed up in the Finals, but it was a complete mirage -- then you figure they make the Finals, and have a sizable chance to win them... but still not a 50% chance.

And I totally get why those chances are not good enough for LeBron James, if he wants to ensure he is regarded as the greatest player of all time. Again, though, he is either going to have a tough time looking Dwyane Wade in the eye again, or looking the city of Cleveland in the eye again. And it was a tough situation to avoid. He would have had to know what he wanted to do from the jump... and I legitimately believe that he did not... that he wanted the Heat to present him with a plan that would make the Heat the title favorites even without having to rely much on Wade. But short of bringing in Melo or another megastar, I don't know what Pat Riley was supposed to be able to tell him.

Some weird analytic choices made there, opting for SPM, even though the ARPMmetrics page he linked to doesn't discuss it (using D. Myers' ASPM instead). Also the clear winner from the predictive side was RAPM, which is now part of the ESPN universe, and yet it was also not chosen.

I used to post at another NBA site, low-traffic, but near my hometown, and they have offered me a max deal (two bags of corn chips and a grape soda, delivered directly to my mother's basement at her house) to return there as a regular poster, so I am weighing it carefully with my people. We have had a great run here, but now that I'm slowing down a little, I may want to post somewhere where there are some younger guys and there is more cyberspace to develop new posting talent. We have a lot of high-post-count alpha dogs here (berg, Taylor, DK, Hombre, NJ, Booey, others) so I don't know if BTF is still the best fit for me at this stage of my career.

NBA players love love love LA, Miami and Phoenix. Atlanta is perhaps surprisingly popular to some, all things being equal - there is a large, highly-educated, wealthy African-American population there.

Basically most players not from a cold-weather city don't have those at the top of their list.

I've mentioned that NY's appeal is in part because the Knicks practice in the Westchester suburbs, so they live there. Not that many people not from NYC are automatically eager to live there, even with tons of money.

Chicago is pretty popular, but that winter turns off a lot of players. Otherwise it would be near the top, as it is with baseball players.

Not sure if Boston still leaves some African-American players wary; it used to. Phoenix can be weird like that, too, but it's got wide open spaces and golf year-round.

Salt Lake City is unique - the locals tend to be very polite and well-meaning, but I've mentioned seeing them first-hand try not to gawk at a black power forward walk around a shopping mall. No evil intent, but nobody likes feeling like they're stuck in a zoo.

A lot of players, and this makes sense, like to play either on their own turf or in climate and sociological circumstances similar to what they're familiar with.

Salt Lake City is unique - the locals tend to be very polite and well-meaning, but I've mentioned seeing them first-hand try not to gawk at a black power forward walk around a shopping mall. No evil intent, but nobody likes feeling like they're stuck in a zoo.

I'm curious how recent was this? My mom (born in the 50s) has told me a few stories that makes this sound like a typical reaction while she was a kid, but I wouldn't expect that to still happen in/around SLC anymore.

I used to post at another NBA site, low-traffic, but near my hometown, and they have offered me a max deal (two bags of corn chips and a grape soda, delivered directly to my mother's basement at her house) to return there as a regular poster, so I am weighing it carefully with my people. We have had a great run here, but now that I'm slowing down a little, I may want to post somewhere where there are some younger guys and there is more cyberspace to develop new posting talent. We have a lot of high-post-count alpha dogs here (berg, Taylor, DK, Hombre, NJ, Booey, others) so I don't know if BTF is still the best fit for me at this stage of my career.

madvillain,
not black (or Jewish; 100 pct Irish), just traveled the NBA circuit for a long time.

Tom,
you may well be right - I'm talking about up to 10+ years ago, and things have changed almost everywhere. I do think the NBA player perception of same lingers, but it may just be from having heard stories from older teammates.

if Boston no longer gets much pushback from NBA players, then we've really come a long way.

Salt Lake City is unique - the locals tend to be very polite and well-meaning, but I've mentioned seeing them first-hand try not to gawk at a black power forward walk around a shopping mall. No evil intent, but nobody likes feeling like they're stuck in a zoo.

This is mostly true, though not for the reasons some critics assume. It's not "Wow, look, a black guy!" It's that Jazz players (and opponents when they're in town) are pretty much the only celebrities we have, so when we see a 6'8" black man walking around, it's hard to resist the urge to try and get a look at his face to see if it's someone you recognize. Averaged sized black guys wouldn't get a second look.

But yeah, I've been guilty of doing that myself, and I can see how it could be annoying for those on the receiving end. I guess it's sorta par for the course when you're a celebrity, but it wouldn't surprise me if Utah locals acted more star-struck than most.

And it works for white guys, too. I saw Kirilenko at a mall a few years back, and people were going out of their way to say hi to him. I guess that could be flattering or annoying, depending on your mood at the time.

Edit: And of course there might be some "I'm doing this, so everyone must be!" involved in my perception of how common it is. ;-)

and yes, madvillain on Berto Center in suburbs. thing about Chicago is it's less of a sea change to go from suburbs into the city. Most players drive to games, and seems to me more complicated for an out-of-towner to get to MSG in midtown NYC vs getting to United Center (not that Chicago doesn't have traffic, obviously).

Considering the Bulls are moving out of the Berto Center this summer and moving to the Advocate Center, which is right next door to the UC (and part of Melo's tour), not sure how that impacts things.

More guys are living in the city these days (Trump Tower is pretty popular for Chicago athletes), cause the commute in is terrible. Bears still HQ way up north, but the other 4 teams all are centered in the city now (or almost will be when the Bulls finish their move).

thing about Chicago is it's less of a sea change to go from suburbs into the city. Most players drive to games, and seems to me more complicated for an out-of-towner to get to MSG in midtown NYC vs getting to United Center (not that Chicago doesn't have traffic, obviously).

NY is one thing, but otherwise I'd still disagree. Deefield to the UC during rush hour would take at least 1.5 hours by car. There's no el stop by the UC, so public transportion isn't ideal for visitors - though it is closish to the loop. And the area around the UC is still terrible (one of the worst neighborhoods in the country) with very few bars/restaurants/etc, so that's obviously a huge drawback (and part of the reason the B1G bball tourney hasn't set up permanent residence here).

Sometimes this thread makes me realize how poorly traveled I am. I've been to just a handful of NBA cities: Philly (born here), New York, Boston, Washington, Atlanta, Cleveland. Orlando only if you count going from an airport to the hotel, and then time spent almost 100% at theme parks.

Interestingly, I do much better with former basketball towns: Newark, Long Island, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Baltimore, Pittsburgh.

"More guys are living in the city these days (Trump Tower is pretty popular for Chicago athletes), cause the commute in is terrible. Bears still HQ way up north, but the other 4 teams all are centered in the city now (or almost will be when the Bulls finish their move).

geesh, not only is this true, but some Bulls (and the Cubs MGR) were living in the very luxury apt complex my future wife was managing when I met her! #brainfart

Yes it raised a lot of eye brows that Morey opted to pay Parsons this year instead of next, since the presummed plan going in was that he had all the contracts (Lin / Asik / Parsons / Beverley / Jones / Dmo etc.) all lined up to expire next year, where he would presmumably be in play for Love / Aldridge etc if the team hasn't gotten to the point he like.

But he sped up the process by choice. even though at the point of the decision it was very unclear if the big 3 would break up. (it was before the finals started.)

This has been why most folks that follow this situation simply assumed that it was an obvious under the table deal between Morey and Dan Fegan (who represent both Parsons and Dwight.) that as part of Fegan helping Dwight to choose Houston Morey would do him a favor by paying his other client a year earlier, part of this would also assume that in return Parsons and Fegan wouldn't just go out there and sign an offer sheet right away to force Morey on the clock...........

It's not only something that's clear if anyone you know works with black execs; it's also been the subject of several NYT articles, a telltale sign in this area that something has become conventional wisdom.

probably less obvious re Atlanta in the 1990s - pre-reality shows. I think it was Friedman's that was a shoe store that made expensive boots up to size 20 or more. Players used to spend a fortune between shootaround and pre-game arrival buying all kinds of boots, then showing them off in the locker room later.

So would you guys match Hayward's max offer? I think Pelton said he would in a chat last week. I don't find the Hayward is better than nothing logic very compelling. I'd let him walk and either let teams rent the cap space or try to do what Dallas did last year and sign mid-tier FAs with the $$.

So would you guys match Hayward's max offer? I think Pelton said he would in a chat last week. I don't find the Hayward is better than nothing logic very compelling. I'd let him walk and either let teams rent the cap space or try to do what Dallas did last year and sign mid-tier FAs with the $$.

Match without hesitating. Who else exactly are they supposed to spend their money on? And who is Hayward going to prevent them from signing/re-signing?

I think tshipman (I think that's who it was) is right that Hayward's upside is a 3rd banana. I don't see that as a bad thing though, as I think he could develop into the 3rd best player on a contending team. He doesn't have any one area that he excels at to really think his upside is higher, but he has the potential to be good at everything you need from a wing.

In addition to the Jazz, Cavs, and Hornets, the Suns and Celtics were reportedly very interested in Hayward, and must have known it would have taken a max or near max contract to have any chance at getting him. Pelton and Lowe both both agree with the Jazz matching. Is there a single decent NBA analyst that disagrees with matching?

In addition to the Jazz, Cavs, and Hornets, the Suns and Celtics were reportedly very interested in Hayward, and must have known it would have taken a max or near max contract to have any chance at getting him. Pelton and Lowe both both agree with the Jazz matching. Is there a single decent NBA analyst that disagrees with matching?

Matt Moore and Zach Harper don't like it that much, they're obviously a teir below Pelton / Lowe in terms of educated opinions but they're quite smart as well.

I think there is a plausible argument in not matching, but the moves that would need to eventually happen to justify it seems like a pretty long shot for Utah at this stage.

This has been why most folks that follow this situation simply assumed that it was an obvious under the table deal between Morey and Dan Fegan (who represent both Parsons and Dwight.) that as part of Fegan helping Dwight to choose Houston Morey would do him a favor by paying his other client a year earlier, part of this would also assume that in return Parsons and Fegan wouldn't just go out there and sign an offer sheet right away to force Morey on the clock...........

It's a Bill Hicks quote. Hot and sunny weather (almost) every day is "perfect" if you're a cold blooded reptile, or I suppose if you can pipe in water from elsewhere (edit: oh and AC); many mammals prefer other climes but YMMV.

I guess, though that's a different CBA rule, in this one, Morey can still match, the problem is that by the time he has to Bosh may not have decided and he probably can't have the backup plans lined up .

In that case, if I were him, I would totally match and then pull back the Lin and Asik trade, because you have already proven the point that you can trade them, so if you really still want to trade them that badly, aim for taking guys that can play, I have always wanted them to go after Amir Johnson or Paul Millsap. right now the later seems out of reach, but the former may be realistically had.

Amir has quitely been the guy that's always top 15 or so in the league in adjusetd +/- in the last 3 years, most of the guys on said list are super stars, Amir obviously isn't, but that almost certainly mean he's a super role player, and Houston has their super stars, they need super role players, if they do get Bosh they're still asking him to be a super role player, so why not go grab one in Amir while still having other quality role players instead of a bunch of question marks?

Yep. It's only for 4 years, so that's a gamble worth taking. Tom brought up a good point earlier that Hayward's contract is going to end before Exum is up for another, so if Exum does develop into a star, signing Hayward now isn't going to hurt the Jazz's chances of keeping Dante later.

I'd let him walk and either let teams rent the cap space or try to do what Dallas did last year and sign mid-tier FAs with the $$.

Don't they have the cap space to sign Hayward AND try to pick up some mid tier free agents? Jazz should be trying to win NOW, IMO, not collecting more assets. You can only do that for so long, and they've already got an entire starting lineup of top 10 picks aged 24 or younger (assuming they match Gordon), plus Burks off the bench. They need to give that nucleus a chance and hope that one or more of them develops into something special. I don't see any better options right now.

Woj implies that the mixed messages stem from LeBron's agent Rich Paul wanting Cleveland, vs. LeBron himself wanting Miami. (Which of course would then imply, given who gets to make the final call, that the guy's gonna end up in Miami.)

If that's the case, then LeBron apparently ain't that great a businessman after all, since his own agent has gone rogue... and any negative fallout from the Cleveland flirtation isn't going to be borne by Rich Paul. (And indeed, this amusingly clashes with Simmons' ridiculous theory that LeBron's goal in all this is to make Rich Paul famous. At least I'm pretty sure that was Simmons. If not, I apologize. It was someone who podcasts...)

Re: Parsons: I don't think RFAing him can only be explained by an under-the-table deal... it's consistent with just loving the guy and not wanting to lose him. They are, after all, guaranteed to be able to keep him for the next few years now... if they want to badly enough.

I do think it's probably fair to say that they didn't expect Parsons to leave... because I'm sure he does love it there, and they didn't expect anyone to offer him $15M a year... and that they did expect to have Lin/Asik deals done by now. Insofar as that may be true, then they did make some risky assumptions. (And insofar as that may be true, the poison pills don't look too brilliant.)

It wouldn't exactly be the end of the world, though, if they ran Harden/Deng/Bosh/Dwight or something out there. Ultimately, if they have to choose between Parsons for sure and a chance at Bosh (which I doubt will even happen, it'd be a mega dick move by LeBron to do that to Bosh), I think they would have to choose the chance at Bosh. The Mavs did make life tougher for them, though, no doubt. (Especially in the Cuban wet dream scenario where they lose out on both Parsons and Bosh.)

HMS: It was a purely theoretical question. The point of the exercise is that if no one else would want to give up anything of value to acquire the contract, it's not a good contract and you shouldn't sign it without an extenuating reason specific to your team.

So here's my question: if you guys are of the opinion that you can't lose assets in Utah, even if they're not particularly good assets, why didn't they offer Hayward's contract to Millsap?

I was torn about whether they should have resigned Millsap, but in the end I think they didn't cuz they had Favors and Kanter coming off the bench and they were hoping one of them could replace Paul's production (and maybe surpass it). Ditto with Al Jefferson. They had no one on their bench they could even reasonably hope to plug into Haywards role and expect similar (or better) results.

A team with Millsap and Jefferson as it's two best players is going to be a slightly above .500 team in the west that either barely misses the playoffs (2013), or squeaks in as an 8th seed and gets crushed in the first round (2012). Maybe with hindsight it'll seem stupid that the Jazz gave up those two and pinned their hopes on Favors/Kanter instead, but overall I think it was a worthwhile gamble. I'd rather take a chance with young guys that MIGHT turn into stars than be stuck in .500 limbo forever with players that are already past the age where they could still improve.

Edit: In hindsight though, yes, I probably would've kept Millsap and saw what I could get for Kanter. But again, that wasn't obvious at the time.

I was torn about whether they should have resigned Millsap, but in the end I think they didn't cuz they had Favors and Kanter coming off the bench and they were hoping one of them could replace Paul's production (and maybe surpass it). Ditto with Al Jefferson. They had no one on their bench they could even reasonably hope to plug into Haywards role and expect similar (or better) results.

A team with Millsap and Jefferson as it's two best players is going to be a slightly above .500 team in the west that either barely misses the playoffs (2013), or squeaks in as an 8th seed and gets crushed in the first round (2012). Maybe with hindsight it'll seem stupid that the Jazz gave up those two and pinned their hopes on Favors/Kanter instead, but overall I think it was a worthwhile gamble. I'd rather take a chance with young guys that MIGHT turn into stars than be stuck in .500 limbo forever with players that are already past the age where they could still improve.

Edit: In hindsight though, yes, I probably would've kept Millsap and saw what I could get for Kanter. But again, that wasn't obvious at the time.]

Yup I was a lot higher on Kanter last year, and unlike Millsap, Hayward should not take development away from young talented players. They should never have trusted Corbin over a youth movement and it turned out Millsap would not have stunted Kanter, but being as bad as they were enabled them to get a player with legit star potential, so it worked out even of they were lucky that it did so. With Hayward, I don't see him putting them into NBA purgatory this season like Millsap may have last year, and if he's good enough to do so, it means he's far surpassed our hopes and they have a star or quasi-star in addition to Exum's potential, and therefore the need for another star in the draft is lessened.

With Hayward, I don't see him putting them into NBA purgatory this season like Millsap may have last year,

Yeah, that too. If they'd kept Millsap, maybe they win 30 or 35 games last year instead of 25, and then they don't get Exum. Once they jettisoned all their useful veterans (not just Paul and Al, but also Mo Williams, Foye, and DeMarre Carrol), it became obvious that they intended to tank the season for a high draft pick while giving the youngens a chance to develop. Millsap would've stood in the way of both those goals (since he played the same position as one of the young guys they were hoping would improve).